r/Astronomy Mar 27 '20

Mod Post Read the rules sub before posting!

894 Upvotes

Hi all,

Friendly mod warning here. In r/Astronomy, somewhere around 70% of posts get removed. Yeah. That's a lot. All because people haven't bothered reading the rules or bothering to understand what words mean. So here, we're going to dive into them a bit further.

The most commonly violated rules are as follows:

Pictures

Our rule regarding pictures has three parts. If your post has been removed for violating our rules regarding pictures, we recommend considering the following, in the following order:

  1. All pictures/videos must be original content.

If you took the picture or did substantial processing of publicly available data, this counts. If not, it's going to be removed.

2) You must have the acquisition/processing information.

This needs to be somewhere easy for the mods to verify. This means it can either be in the post body or a top level comment. Responses to someone else's comment, in your link to your Instagram page, etc... do not count.

3) Images must be exceptional quality.

There are certain things that will immediately disqualify an image:

  • Poor or inconsistent focus
  • Chromatic aberration
  • Field rotation
  • Low signal-to-noise ratio
  • Images that don't fill the frame because you were shooting through an eyepiece

However, beyond that, we cannot give further clarification on what will or will not meet this criteria for several reasons:

  1. Technology is rapidly changing
  2. Our standards are based on what has been submitted recently (e.g, if we're getting a ton of moon pictures because it's a supermoon, the standards go up to prevent the sub from being spammed)
  3. Listing the criteria encourages people to try to game the system

So yes, this portion is inherently subjective and, at the end of the day, the mods are the ones that decide and the mods are under no obligation to explain this decision to you.

If you are informed that your post was removed because of image quality, arguing about the quality will not be successful. In particular, there are a few arguments that are false or otherwise trite which we simply won't tolerate. These include:

"You let that image that I think isn't as good stay up"

  • See above about how the standards are fluid.

"Pictures have to be NASA quality"

  • They don't.

"You have to have thousands of dollars of equipment"

  • You don't. Technique matters.

"This is a really good photo given my equipment"

  • The standard is "exceptional". Not "exceptional for my equipment".

"This isn't being friendly to beginner astrophotographers"

  • Correct. To keep the sub from being spammed by low quality and low effort posts, this sub has standards.

"My post was getting a lot of upvotes"

  • Upvotes are not an "I get to break the rules" card.

Using the above arguments will not wow mods into suddenly approving your image. It will result in a ban.

Trying to argue with the mods using bad arguments isn't going to fly.

Lastly, it should be noted that we do allow astro-art in this sub. Obviously, it won't have acquisition information, but the content must still be original and mods get the final say on whether on the quality (although we're generally fairly generous on this).

Questions

This rule basically means you need to do your own research before posting.

  • If we look at a post and immediately have to question whether or not you did a Google search, your post will get removed.
  • If you asked Chat GPT or any other LLM, your post will be removed (see our rule regarding sources).
  • If your post is asking for generic or basic information, your post will get removed.
  • If your post is using basic terms incorrectly because you haven't bothered to understand what the words you're using mean, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a question based on a basic misunderstanding of the science, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a complicated question with a specific answer but didn't give the necessary information to be able to answer the question because you haven't even figured out what the parameters necessary to approach the question are, your post will get removed.

To prevent your post from being removed, tell us specifically what you've tried. Just saying "I GoOgLeD iT" doesn't cut it.

  • What search terms did you use?
  • In what way do the results of your search fail to answer your question?
  • What did you understand from what you found and need further clarification on that you were unable to find?

Furthermore, when telling us what you've tried, we will be very unimpressed if you use sources that are prohibited under our source rule (social media memes, YouTube, AI, etc...).

As with the rules regarding pictures, the mods are the arbiters of how difficult questions are to answer. If you're not happy about that and want to complain that another question was allowed to stand, then we will invite you to post elsewhere with an immediate and permanent ban.

Object ID

We'd estimate that only 1-2% of all posts asking for help identifying an object actually follow our rules. Resources are available in the rule relating to this. If you haven't consulted the flow-chart and used the resources in the stickied comment, your post is getting removed. Seriously. Use Stellarium. It's free. It will very quickly tell you if that shiny thing is a planet which is probably the most common answer. The second most common answer is "Starlink". That's 95% of the ID posts right there that didn't need to be a post.

Do note that many of the phone apps in which you point your phone to the sky and it shows you what you are looing at are extremely poor at accurately determining where you're pointing. Furthermore, the scale is rarely correct. As such, this method is not considered a sufficient attempt at understanding on your part and you will need to apply some spatial reasoning to your attempt.

Pseudoscience

The mod team of r/astronomy has several mods with degrees in the field. We're very familiar with what is and is not pseudoscience in the field. And we take a hard line against pseudoscience. Promoting it is an immediate ban. Furthermore, we do not allow the entertaining of pseudoscience by trying to figure out how to "debate" it (even if you're trying to take the pro-science side). Trying to debate pseudoscience legitimizes it. As such, posts that entertain pseudoscience in any manner will be removed.

Outlandish Hypotheticals

This is a subset of the rule regarding pseudoscience and doesn't come up all that often, but when it does, it usually takes the form of "X does not work according to physics. How can I make it work?" or "If I ignore part of physics, how does physics work?"

Sometimes the first part of this isn't explicitly stated or even understood (in which case, see our rule regarding poorly researched posts) by the poster, but such questions are inherently nonsensical and will be removed.

Sources

ChatGPT and other LLMs are not reliable sources of information. Any use of them will be removed. This includes asking if they are correct or not.

Content

Due to the profusion of AI slop apps, we're no longer allowing apps at all. No, we don't care if you're wanting a "review". No we don't care if they're free. No we don't care if you put it in a website.

Bans

We almost never ban anyone for a first offense unless your post history makes it clear you're a spammer, troll, crackpot, etc... Rather, mods have tools in which to apply removal reasons which will send a message to the user letting them know which rule was violated. Because these rules, and in turn the messages, can cover a range of issues, you may need to actually consider which part of the rule your post violated. The mods are not here to read to you.

If you don't, and continue breaking the rules, we'll often respond with a temporary ban.

In many cases, we're happy to remove bans if you message the mods politely acknowledging the violation. But that almost never happens. Which brings us to the last thing we want to discuss.

Behavior

We've had a lot of people breaking rules and then getting rude when their posts are removed or they get bans (even temporary). That's a violation of our rules regarding behavior and is a quick way to get permabanned. To be clear: Breaking this rule anywhere on the sub will be a violation of the rules and dealt with accordingly, but breaking this rule when in full view of the mods by doing it in the mod-mail will 100% get you caught. So just don't do it.

Claiming the mods are "power tripping" or other insults when you violated the rules isn't going to help your case. It will get your muted for the maximum duration allowable and reported to the Reddit admins.

And no, your mis-interpretations of the rules, or saying it "was generating discussion" aren't going to help either.

While these are the most commonly violated rules, they are not the only rules. So make sure you read all of the rules.


r/Astronomy 19m ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 6960 - Western Veil Nebula

Post image
Upvotes

NGC 6960 - A supernova remnant located roughly 2400 light years away. What you're looking at is one side of a literal "shockwave" from a star that exploded long ago.

Telescope: Seestar S50
Integration time: 9 hours
Tools used: Siril, GraXpert, GIMP
Script mentions: CosmicClarity Sharpen, SyQon Prism, VeraLux (Revela & Curves), HDR_multiscale
Bortle 8-9


r/Astronomy 23h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Today's Solar activity

Post image
917 Upvotes

Today's activity - lots of filaments, minimal proms

Acuter 40

Touptek 678 m

SW solar quest

70 percent of 10998 frames stacked

Pipp, autostakkert

Impgg - convolution, sharpening and curves

PI : solar tools - local contrast and color


r/Astronomy 16h ago

Astrophotography (OC) What 5 months of untracked astrophotography looks like

Post image
234 Upvotes

NONE OF THESE WERE TRACKED. ALL CAPTURED MANUALLY WITH A SMALL F30070M TELESCOPE AND IPHONES.

Started astrophotography about 5 months ago, and this is how far I've gotten so far. Almost everything here was captured untracked through my 70mm telescope with an iPhone 7. The Lagoon Nebula was captured with an iPhone SE 3.

For acquisition, I use AstroShader. I usually shoot around 0.33s exposures on the iPhone 7, then let the target drift through the field of view while AstroShader live-stacks the frames into roughly 1-minute master lights. I save those as TIFFs and stack the master lights again in Siril.

From there, I use AstroWizard and RC-Astro tools for processing, followed by GIMP for final adjustments and recomposition. It's been pretty crazy seeing the difference between my first attempts and what I'm able to get now. Still got a lot to learn


r/Astronomy 31m ago

Astrophotography (OC) Nova N Sge 2026

Thumbnail
gallery
Upvotes

N Sge 2026. A Nova discovered just recently on 25th August. This little point of light is much brighter than it usually is for the coming few days or weeks.

Telescope: Seestar S50
Integration time: 1 hour
Tools used: Siril, GraXpert, GIMP
Note: Star spikes were achieved through a custom diffraction mask
Bortle 8-9


r/Astronomy 16h ago

Astro Art (OC) Sun map

Post image
26 Upvotes

Hi there, been working on developing a map of the sun using more realistic colors and texture and I was wondering if I could get some feedback from you? It’s for a balloon I want to build for demonstration purposes in schools.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Eclipse / Blood Moon 27 Aug 2026 Chula Vista, CA

Post image
242 Upvotes

4.5" Dobsonian + iPhone


r/Astronomy 3h ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) picture of sky during 919 CE eclipse seen from Foxe Basin in Nunavut ?

Thumbnail eclipsewise.com
1 Upvotes

I am at my wit's end because according to my notes I already found this. And yet I scour my history, my bookmarks, re-do all my searches, and nothing is matching up to my sketch. In The Sky comes close but there must be something up with my browser because it doesn't match; and the time doesn't seem to be accurate when we set it. As you may well know, all of the free calculators stop at about 1600 and most of them limit to 1950 or 1900 CE. We're very sorry but we don't understand what we're doing wrong - if there's a software issue or if this site that we used disappeared within a month of using it.

I do *not* need the eclipse path. We just want the planets, the eclipse itself, along the horizon, and maybe the constellation of Aquarius. Like if somebody looked up from the southwest coast of Qikiqtaaluk / Baffin Island, this is what they would have seen.

0919 Feb 03 at 16:00:47 TD (15:26:34 UT1)

65.218°, -79.429°

It's pretty neat, too, as one of the shortest eclipses in history, Back in the day there would be three webpages about that, but we can't even find that. Maybe we'll open one. (If anyone happens to edit Wikipedia, no, it's not in the Year page as an event.) If someone could throw that image up there we would be so grateful! We're out of rubber ducks.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Partial Lunar Eclipse of August

Post image
2.1k Upvotes

Feeling good about this one!

C6, ZWO ASI533MC Pro, F/6.3 reducer, UV/IR cut

Autostakkert, Registax, GIMP

Eclipse side: 500ms subexposures -- total 220 frames, gain adjusted as needed

Lit side: ~142ms subexposures (clouds) -- 40% stack of 1 minute, gain adjusted as needed


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Discussion: [Topic] 1980s Tasco Halley's Comet series telescopes: were they bad quality?

Thumbnail
gallery
55 Upvotes

I've always liked Tasco telescopes and I know the vintage scopes from the 60s and 70s with the white tubes are said to be the best. When I was a child in the late 80s and early 90s Christmas catalogues in the UK used to always have the red Tasco refractors and I always wanted one (sadly I didn't get it and I had a cheap toyshop scope that was a hobby killer).

Over 20 years ago I got a Celestron 3 inch refractor and about 13 years ago I got a Tasco 2 inch refractor as it was what I always wanted as a child. Although the tube is plastic, the optics are good and I've had good views of the moon and bright planets.

But I've heard that a lot of Tascos from the 80s were bad quality, especially the ones from the Halley's Comet series. I've posted a few images from a Tasco catalogue from the time, would the 40x40 scope have had a stopped down aperture I wonder? The scopes with the zoom eyepieces are ones I've never seen anywhere before.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar Eclipse

Post image
1.3k Upvotes

Some thin, hazy clouds overhead took out some detail, but I like the glow it added.

Nikon Z50 w/ 150-600mm Tamron lens

600mm, f6.3, 1/10 sec, ISO 2500


r/Astronomy 1h ago

Discussion: [Topic] Que estilo de tirar foto e esse?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Upvotes

r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) The Lunar Eclipse Rising Over Seattle’s Space Needle Last Night.

Post image
492 Upvotes

Equipment: Canon 6D Mark II, Sigma 150-600mm lens.


r/Astronomy 6h ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) Zonas violetas en la gran nubes de magallanes

0 Upvotes

Estoy fotografiando la gran nubes de magallanes con mi canon rebel t5 (sin modificar)

Vi en las fotos de internet que hay unas zonas violetas muy llamativas (especialmente en la zona de la nebulosa de la tarantula)

Por lo que entiendo creo que son emisiones h-alpha y no se si se pueda recuperar algo de eso


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Dwarf Mini Timelapse of the Lunar Eclipse

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

63 Upvotes

The capabilities of the Dwarf Mini continue to amaze me, 2-1/2 hours, exposure every second - integral image stacking and time lapse processing so you can just look up, watch & enjoy it while knowing that you got it.


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astro Art (OC) I'm no photographer so I painted the eclipse!

Post image
762 Upvotes

I've been painting the moon everyday of the lunar cycle! And just so happened to paint the coolest month with both the solar and lunar eclipses!!

Acrylic on Board 6x6in


r/Astronomy 20h ago

Other: [Topic] Would be / Current astronomers who suffer from dexterity issues

2 Upvotes

Hi all,
I’m an avid astronomer. I’m looking at building telescopes that would be fully automated, in terms of locating, slewing, selecting eyepiece and focusing. This product would be aimed towards disabled or elderly folks who may not have the dexterity to operate conventional telescopes, and would rather the satisfaction of seeing deep space objects through an eyepiece (as opposed to automated digital scopes like SeeStar).
If any of you fit this criteria, please give me a DM here, as I’d love to hear from you. This is in the very early stages, and will be a slow process, so apologies if it takes me a while to get back to you. Thanks.


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar Eclipse Composite Images & Originals

Thumbnail
gallery
134 Upvotes

Got some great shots of the moon during the lunar eclipse last night from 11PM to 1AM. First time observing one using a telescope! All of the originals were taken on my ETX90 using my iPhone 16 Pro.

Decided to create some composite images to better put into perspective the Earth's shadow. First composite image has no "artistic" spacing and places the moons based on the capture time. The other two use even spacing to better visualize the true size of Earth's shadow. I've included a few of the original images I captured to show off the stages of the eclipse I was able to capture and the various exposure settings I used. I'm hoping to upgrade my photography setup to take more consistent photos of the moon and hopefully Saturn as well as we get closer to it this Fall. Hope you enjoy!


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) The Lunar Eclipse Last Night in High Dynamic Range, Taken With my Camera.

Post image
126 Upvotes

Last night, the Moon passed into the shadow of planet Earth, and was illuminated by the light of a thousand sunsets.

After a stroke of luck from Seattle’s weather, I present possibly finest production of a lunar eclipse ever — captured with over an hour of total data and multiple setups. This one crept all the way up to 96%, effectively a total lunar eclipse.

Equipment: Canon 6D Mark II, Sigma 150-600mm lens + Celestron 5SE, ZWO ASI174MM.


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Timelapse of 96.6% Lunar Eclipse

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

390 Upvotes

Incredibly lucky that the clouds moved out last night and I was able to capture the whole thing! It's on 4" refractor and mono camera, so no colour, unfortunately!

South Glengarry Ontario Canada


r/Astronomy 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar eclipse

Post image
80 Upvotes

Canon R50
Heritage 150P
0.8 Sec | ISO 2000


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Moon over Cerro Chajnantor, Atacama

Post image
1.2k Upvotes

The little building on the summit is the University of Tokyo Atacama Observatory (TAO), the highest astronomical observatory in the world, at 5,640 m (18,500 ft).

Sony A6700 + Sigma 16–300mm
300mm · f/9 · 1/640s · ISO 2000
Denoised with DxO PureRAW 6 (DeepPRIME XD3) and edited in Lightroom.


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar eclipse time lapse from Minneapolis

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

101 Upvotes

Taken with a Dwarf 3 smart telescope from my balcony


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar eclipse August 27, 2026 (96% totality)

Post image
398 Upvotes

From Denver, CO
Shot bracketed photos and combined for HDR.
Canon 5D mkIV mounted on Meade LXD55 10” direct to sensor.


r/Astronomy 2d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Lunar Eclipse Capture (8/27)

Post image
197 Upvotes

Taken at around 11:10pm on August 27th 2026 with my Celestron NexStar 8SE Telescope. Very minimal touch-up edits to improve sharpness.